"All that I can say for certain is t hat, beneath the scrambled chaos of my memories, I feel a driving imperative, a sense of some vital task that I must complete,d and which has not yet reached cessation. But I could be completely mistaken. Perhaps I was simply a tourist, ambling his way from sight to sight with no greater goal than to accumulate memories and experience - much like yourselves, in fact."
Alastair Reynolds, House of Suns.
There were already certain errors written out in the concrete. He chundered and was immediately wracked with guilt. He knew the answer wasn't here; at the bottom of the lead aquarium. He could feel the atmosphere bearing down upon him. Sole heir to the throne of thought? I don't think so. The liquid black road was talking to him; as if made of animate substance. He could feel the intelligence in the fabric of things, God talking to him. And yet he was a denier. The scepticism began early. Why would you believe anything these bastards said? Why was the world so opposed to him, to what he was, to sexuality, to his errant thoughts and feeble presence? Was he that corroded, corrosive, evil?
There were sneering bullies wherever he looked. The single scariest thing about climate change is: what if the deniers are correct? What if hundreds of millions of people have been caught up in a mass delusion? Have been duped by governments expanding their own control? Have been conned into supporting extra taxes because they think they're saving the planet? The ridicule that is dished out should be a warning sign to any one who believes this nonsense? The robotic Climate Change Minister Penny Wong repeats the propaganda without shame. She ridicules the opposition for being secret deniers, yet what is wrong with open debate, a discussion of facts. If you want to know what it was like to be a heretic in medieval times; say you don't believe in climate change.
Surely the fact that anyone who doesn't swallow the story is ridiculed would be enough to set off warning bells. But no. Anyone who doubts is relegated to the Neanderthals. They spin yarns about rising sea levels. But Venice would already be under water if it was true. They say the world is warming and we've just shivered through the coldest winter in 30 years. But the facts are irrelevant in the march to hysteria world; to make believe Annie and the circus of thoughts. As the much qualified scientist David Evans put it: When it is realised that the Labor Party already knew the global warming alarm was bogus when they deliberately set out to wreck the economy through an emissions trading scheme, they will be out of power for many years to come.
The Liberals, scared by their defeat at the last election, with climate change a factor, say nothing or seek postponement. They don't have the guts to come out and say: it's a load of baloney. But the non believers are spreading by the day. The fabric is becoming increasingly hard to maintain by the day. Shadows crawl across landscapes; and nothing is lost. There are new directions. He is joining in the triumph. Worlds can change in an instant; with the power of the word. Mass delusions rise and fall. The trouble is, in our media saturated world, the garbage has come to dominate. Nothing much that is left is really true. They tell you one thing and mean another. They peddle lies based on motherhood assumptions, talk about promoting diversity, and ridicule anyone who doesn't accept their view of the world.
They are all wrong. The evil lies in the gap, in the construction of the façade. Shadows would have added depth to this over lit world, but instead their is the sneering arrogance of men in black suits, their belief that the population needs to be fooled for their own good, that ripping millions off the toiling masses to create a dysfunctional and ineffective multi-layered bureaucracy and multi-tiered government structure was actually worth the bother. He didn't believe any more. His taxes went on hundreds if not thousands of government programs he neither agreed with or personally benefited from. After years in this job, his cynicism had become even greater. The young ones come on, arrogant, impassioned, curel in the dark ages.
And nothing was left. Their passions always came from the left, for the dispossessed, to right some historical wrong. But generation after generation had come with the same belief, the same passions, the same determinations, and all that was left was groaning buildings and new sets of injustices, wrong places, wrong times, structures that simply didn't work. All underlain by lies; complete and total lies; as they protect the most vicious, corrupt and dishonest of courts, the laziest and most ineffective of politicians, the most pointless of paper shuffling mountains, departments that did nothing, helped no one. Achieved nought. And here he was asking for relief, for truth, for someone who's beacon lit up with agreement: it's all shot, escape is the only solution. Find a place of your own far away; and stay there. Forever. The world, this government, these people, these pointless bureaucracies staffed with Marx's "useful fools", they have betrayed us one and all.
THE BIGGER STORY:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24576638-11949,00.html
RESERVE Bank board member Warwick McKibbin has warned the proposed carbon trading scheme will make Australia's economy more vulnerable to global economic shocks.
The respected ANU economist, who has been advocating a hybrid tax and permit trading scheme to provide price certainty and flexibility in reducing greenhouse emissions, warns today the Garnaut model is likely to cause unexpected problems if operating during future financial shocks.
He also warns future global shocks will have a wider impact and spread faster under a global cap and trade emissions trading scheme.
“We found that a global cap and trade regime would be extremely vulnerable to shocks in any single economy. They would change the way that growth shocks would otherwise be transmitted between region,” Professor McKibbin says in research released today.
“Price-based approaches, such as a global carbon tax levied at a national level or our Hybrid model provide stronger firewalls to prevent adverse events in one carbon market causing a collapse of the global system.”
His research suggests governments will face enormous pressure to relax or repeal such policies perceived to impede economic growth.
“The first lesson is that any policy framework whose costs or benefits depend strongly on forecasts of the future state of the world or national economic conditions is likely to fail because the forecast is likely to be wrong,” the research states.
“A global cap and trade scheme, or alternative systems such as Stern (2006) or the Garnaut Review (2008) would be extremely vulnerable to shocks in any single economy.”
According to Treasury modelling on the proposed emissions trading scheme released today, it will cut economic growth and push up inflation.
Without emissions trading, GNP per capita would expand by 1.2 per cent each year. With emissions trading, it would gain 1.1 per cent.
The modelling found emissions trading, due to start in 2010, would result in a one-off spike in the consumer price index of between one and 1.5 per cent, higher than previous estimates.
“It shows that taking early action will allow an orderly and gradual adjustment to a low-carbon economy,” Mr Swan said.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24573411-36281,00.html
Well, that's all right then.
Actually no. Treasury hasn't got the slightest idea about the impact of the emissions trading scheme on a real economy. It and everyone else has never been even remotely close to 'there' before.
Its climate modelling is worth 'slightly less' than its budget modelling -- and the latter is worth four-fifths of five-eighths of very little.
It is a political disgrace for the Government to try to pretend the modelling has the slightest value.
It is a bureaucratic disgrace for Treasury to engage in such a statistical fraud on the Australian public.
In pursuit of its statistical nonsense, Treasury has to 'invent a can opener'. Indeed a whole series of can openers.
Can opener? The story of an economist, an accountant and a doctor washed up on a treasure - maybe even a treasury - island.
They find a stash of old cans of food, the ones without ring-pull tops. How to open them?
The answer from the economist, who clearly had spent his life in Treasury: assume a can opener.
Exactly that applies with the ETS and its impact on individual companies and the great complex mass of the economy.
It's not just that the price of energy is artificially increased, but it has to be assumed that new energy will seamlessly replace our existing carbon-based energy.
I suggest Ken Henry be required to run both his department and his house entirely on wind or solar energy. His choice.
Further, this artificial increase in energy prices as a consequence of the ETS changes the whole matrix of relationships in the economy, in ways that Treasury modellers can only guess at.
I do not trust their guesses.
Any move to an emissions trading scheme will sow havoc among Australian companies and jobs and incomes.
If Treasury begs to disagree, I offer its collective wisdom a wager.
Let it get within 50 per cent on its budget surplus/deficit forecast this year.
Indeed, I'll even give it all the data from the first half of the year to 'model'. We can use the forecast in the mid-year budget update issued next month as the base.
If Treasury gets within 50 per cent, I'll supply the can opene
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/content/view/2634/228/
"Global Warming" Has Stopped
Written by Lord Christopher Monckton
via icecap.us
Saturday, 01 November 2008
In a blog post, Bill Chameides says “global warming” is still happening. It isn’t. As the global temperature graph below shows, all four of the world’s major global surface temperature datasets (NASA GISS; RSS; UAH; and Hadley/University of East Anglia) show a decline in temperatures that have now persisted for seven years.
‘Global warming’? What ‘global warming’? All four of the world’s major surface temperature datasets show seven years of global cooling. The straight lines are the regression lines showing the trend over past seven years. It is decisively downward. Chameides’ graph overleaf appears to have been tampered with to exclude the very rapid cooling that occurred between 2007 (the curve stops in January 2007, when a strong El Nino artificially but temporarily boosted temperatures) and 2008. The fall in temperatures between January 2007 and January 2008, carefully not shown on Chameides’ graph, was the greatest January-January fall since records began in 1880.
The UAH graph provides a complete answer to the Chameides’ attempt to suggest that skeptics” are confusing short-term and longer-term temperature changes. The year 2008 will turn out to have been no warmer than 1980 – 28 years ago. This is not a short-run change: the cooling trend set in as far back as late 2001, seven full years ago, and there has been no net warming since 1995 on any measure. Next, Chameides attempts to suggest that the recent cooling is caused by solar activity. He could well be right - however, if so, by the same token the warming that stopped in 1998 could also have been caused by solar activity - there was, after all, a solar Grand Maximum in the last 70 years of the 20th century, during which the sun was more active and for longer than at almost any previous similar period in the whole of the past 11,400 years.
Scafetta and West (2008) attribute more than two-thirds of the warming of the past 50 years to solar activity - the latest in a series of papers in all parts of the scientific literature that explicitly question the exaggerated estimates of climate sensitivity`perpetrated by the IPCC. Chameides’ final, desperate point is that the “green diamonds” he has so carefully selected from the 5-year running-mean graph that he has equally carefully blotted out show continuously-rising temperatures that overlay what he calls the short-term cooling.
Not so. As the first graph above shows, the linear regression not just for the past five years but for the past seven years shows a decisive and continuing cooling. Keenlyside et al. (2008) do not expect a new record year for global temperature to occur until at least 2015. If they are right, then the IPCC’s climate-sensitivity estimates must be - as Monckton (2008) finds them to be - prodigious exaggerations. False data will no longer convince any impartial mind to believe in the fantasy of anthropogenic “global warming”?
No comments:
Post a Comment